4ft) Nofa'ofthe Montli on [ APRIL, 



afforded in the House of Lords, when Lord Roden affirmed " that 

 national education is nothing without morality, and that there was no 

 morality unless in the unmutilated word of God;" and also warned govern- 

 ment how they might persevere in a course which must bring down the 

 indignation of the Lord on this favoured land. Truly this country is 

 highly favoured, and we ought to be grateful for it ; we have the 

 supreme felicity of eight hundred millions of debt, two millions of 

 paupers, as clamorous as young rooks, the dangerous burthen and deep 

 contamination of eight millions of filthy lucre taken off our hands by 

 the clergy, and wheat at eighty shillings a quarter instead of twenty. 

 When God sends mouths he sends bread enough to fill them, says the 

 proverb, in spite of Dr. Malthus ; the only difficulty is that the mouths 

 all go to one place and the food to another. This, however, is not 

 exactly to our question, which is that of Irish Education. We recollect 

 some thirty years ago when Joseph Lancaster brought forward his 

 system of education, that in a short time nearly all the bishops, headed 

 by Mrs. Trimmer, espoused the cause of Providence in a similar 

 manner. To them it appeared plain that the Lancasterian system of 

 teaching was to lead to heresy and schism, and that this universal run- 

 ning after strange doctrines would bring down the vengeance of an 

 incensed Deity upon merry England. The same outcry was raised 

 when the London University was projected Heaven was to be disho- 

 noured and atheism was to abound in the land ; to prevent which 

 terrible catastrophe, and to save England from utter ruin, the King's 

 College was founded. Now all this we consider highly laudable, but 

 there is one particular about the Irish education affair that strikes us as 

 rather discordant ; namely, that Lord Roden, when he found himself 

 perplexed by the Duke of Wellington, on one side, and the Bishop of 

 London, on the other, proposed, as a mode of settling the whole affair 

 satisfactorily, that government should withdraw the grant from both 

 parties ! 



A THREATENING LETTER. A Peer of Parliament has published a 

 letter in a Tory paper, addressed to Lords Wharncliffe and Harrowby, in 

 which, after a pathetic exordium, he says " I have next been told that 

 Lord Wharncliffe has created a strong sensation of fear amongst the 

 bishops, and that he actually boasts of having brought over many of 

 the right reverend bench to vote for the second reading." Impious ! 

 We wonder the very stones do not rise up in judgment against his lord- 

 ship for so unheard of an atrocity. The peer then continues "Until 

 I witness this defection I have too strong a faith in God and in the 

 Church to conceive it possible ; but if it be so, I shall from that moment 

 consider the Church deserving the ruin impending over them, having 

 themselves contributed to its accomplishment." Thus, after boasting of 

 possessing too strong a faith in God, and in the Church, which he seems 

 to consider to have but little connection with each other, as they require 

 to be separately mentioned, he gives the Church over to its great enemy 

 in the most remorseless style imaginable. Then this paragon of peers 

 concludes by inquiring of the noble lords he is addressing, what has 

 induced them to draw off men of high honour and character from a 

 course of proceeding t( which their own smooth tongues on a former occasion 

 great/!/ induced them to adopt." We must say that this is a very shock- 

 ing affair. We did not imagine that Lords Wharncliffe and Harrowby 



